ArticleZeitschrift fur Gerontologie und Geriatrie2025
[Rehabilitative short-term care (REKUP): acceptance and practicability of a new care concept].
Article in Zeitschrift fur Gerontologie und Geriatrie, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- [Innovation in geriatric rehabilitation].Zeitschrift fur Gerontologie und Geriatrie · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRehabilitative short-term care (REKUP) is aimed at geriatric patients in need of rehabilitation but not (yet) capable of rehabilitation after acute inpatient hospitalization with a positive rehabilitation prognosis. It was tested at two geriatric rehabilitation clinics from October 2020 to March 2022.
objectiveQualitative process evaluation with respect to acceptance (service providers, health insurance), adoption (implementation at the start of the project), practicability (processes, contents, structures) and observed patient satisfaction.
methodsA focus group and 14 semi-structured interviews with a total of 18 employees of both rehabilitation clinics and a health insurance provider were recorded, transcribed and qualitatively analyzed for content.
resultsThe survey of service providers (acute care, model clinics) and the health insurance provider revealed a high level of acceptance and good practicability (processes, contents, structures). Due to the high level of acceptance and the familiar service content in the geriatric rehabilitation clinics, the implementation was feasible and patient satisfaction was rated as very good.
conclusionThe acceptance of REKUP was high because the basic idea was easy to understand. Nevertheless, a careful patient selection is crucial. There is a risk that REKUP could be used as a quick discharge option to avoid capacity problems. The success of treatment perceived by the service provider is based on early exercises, psychosocial care and a longer period of time before rehabilitation, which avoids excessive demands and strengthens self-efficacy. Admission to the long-term nursing home sector is avoided, which has a positive psychological and motivational effect on patients. A transfer of REKUP to other geriatric rehabilitation clinics seems to be easily possible.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.